linux-kernel - Re: x86: A process doesn't stop on hw breakpoints sometimes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 23 May 2016 18:37:46 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: x86: A process doesn't stop on hw breakpoints sometimes

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:05 PM, Andrei Vagin <avagin@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We use breakpoints on CRIU to stop a processes before calling
> rt_sigreturn and we found that sometimes a process runs through a
> break-point without stopping on it.
>
> https://github.com/xemul/criu/issues/162
>
>
> A small reproducer is attached. It forks a child, stops it, sets a
> breakpoint, executes a child, waits when it stops on the breakpoint. I
> execute it a few times concurrently and wait a few minutes.
>
> https://asciinema.org/a/006l3u5v82ubbkfy9fto07agd
>
> I know that it can be reproduced on:
> AMD A10 Micro-6700T
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5200U CPU @ 2.20GHz
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4600U CPU @ 2.10GHz
>
> so It doesn't look like a bug in a processor.

I'm guessing you're either hitting a subtle bug in the mess that is
breakpoint handling or you're hitting a bug in perf's context switch
code.

Given that the breakpoint gets missed many times in a row, this is
presumably either a bug in breakpoint programming (i.e. the thing
isn't actually set in dr0/dr7) or a bug in the bp state tracking.  If
it were a bug in RF flag handling, I'd expect it to skip once and trip
the second time through.

All that being said, I stared at the code for a while and I don't see
the bug.  I can trigger this quite rarely on a VM, and it's not fun to
debug :(

--Andy